Narrative Description - LTC 8900 - Curriculum Unit Project - Schlauch

How did you decided on your unit topic and goals?

I first began this unit plan by reflecting on the requirements, expectations, and curriculum

goals that are defined by my school district and my individual school, or by “beginning with

content standards”(Wiggins and McTighe 256) and the formal curriculum (English 15). ​Romeo

and Juliet ​by William Shakespeare is a major piece of the curriculum, as are varying components

of writing and grammar. Additionally, ​Romeo and Juliet​ is read at the freshmen level in the 4th

quarter of the school year. This is due to horizontal and vertical alignment (English 12-13) as

decided and defined by our school district and separate high schools. Once I had decided to

move forward with ​Romeo and Juliet​, I met with other 9th grade English teachers during our

Professional Learning Community (PLC), and together we flushed out essential standards that

helped us align our classes horizontally and vertically. This was the first stepping stone in

helping guide my overall unit and individual lessons.

In considering the major writing pieces that I am required to incorporate into my

classroom, I focused on the skills that students will have by the end of the school year and how

those skills will be measurable in a synthesized format. Furthermore, I outline the curricular

including argumentative writing, a research paper, narratives, and some other forms of creative

writing. For this particular unit, I focused on argumentative writing (something that students will

be familiar with) and then taking it one step further for the research portion. I also provided

opportunities for students to develop their own stylistic components of writing through poetry

and “image grammar.”

A final piece of the formal curriculum that is required in my district is the use of
NoRedInk.com and applying grammar components. During our Professional Learning

Communities, teachers of all grade levels were asked to identify specific grammatical

components to focus on while using NoRedInk; therefore, I chose a couple of grammatical

pieces to focus on with this particular unit.

Once I decided on the curriculum focus, I then thought about my own pedagogy, the

hidden curriculum (English 16), and skills that I hope students will gain when they leave my

classroom. I wanted to incorporate technology, aspects of speaking and writing, and grammatical

instruction that that not solely focus on memorization of Standardized American English, but

instead a variation of writing opportunities. I wanted to give students a platform to discuss

difficult topics within their own lives and their community and also give them an opportunity to

practice respectful and meaningful online discourse; these topics include ones that align with

characters, events, and subject matter in ​Romeo and Juliet​, including violence, mental health,

gender, suicide, familial expectations, etc. I hoped to build community and compassion (Ahmed

xxi) in the classroom by giving students engaging and fun activities while also allowing them to

speak up about topics that are important to them. With the text itself, I want students to explore

language as something exciting and ever-changing, not filled with drudgery and difficulty.

Finally, I wanted students to have the opportunity to question ​what​ they are being taught and ​why

they are being taught it - namely, with the end-goal focus on whether or not Romeo and Juliet

should be included in the 9th grade curriculum and ensuring real-world application processes

(Wiggins and McTighe 256).

Alternative options could have been just focusing on the curriculum pieces - for example,

reading the play, filling out comprehension questions, focusing on memorization of grammar
rules, and having a test at the end. I decided to take this particular direction because I think it

makes the unit more relevant and meaningful, and I also believe it can reach a wider array of

students by allowing more opportunities for connection to the literature, to their writing, and to

their own experiences.

What was your overall approach to the unit design?

My overall approach to the unit design followed the backward design process, where I 1)

Identified desired results 2) Determined acceptable evidence 3) Planned learning experiences and

instructions (Wiggins and McTighe 18). Once I had an outline of the essential goals, learning

targets, curriculum, district and school expectations, and individual preferences, I then started to

dig into the unit design. I wanted my unit to be something that could be easily accessed by me

and also help guide new educators (we are getting two new freshmen English teachers next year,

so I thought this was the perfect time to start compiling my resources to help guide them next

year). I am familiar with Weebly website, so I decided to organize my unit onto the website.

Again, approach that I used was backward design, because the goals and targets were

determined first, I determined evidence next, and then filled in the activities and instruction last.

I have been teaching ​Romeo and Julie​t for about six years now, so I definitely have an

overabundance of materials and felt like I could take the unit a multitude of directions.

Therefore, I made sure to have clear, established goals and filled in activities according to those

goals. I also considered the time frame for completing this unit - I wanted it to progress at a pace

that allowed the essential goals and learning targets to be reached, but also keep it moving at a

quick enough pace so that students would not be burned out by the length of the unit.
What was your thought process in selecting and sequencing specific lessons?

In sequencing the lessons, I first reflected on student-driven activity to get students

engaged. As written in ​Understanding by Design,​ “By ​engaging,​ we mean a design that the

(diverse) learners find truly thought provoking, fascinating, and energizing”(Wiggins and

McTighe 195). Oftentimes, I think students go into reading Shakespeare with the mentality that

it will be inaccessible and boring. Therefore, I decided against lessons that would reinforce that

idea and instead wanted lessons that were focused on student engagement. For example, for

going through Shakespeare background information, I will have students complete an “Amazing

Race” activity instead of a PowerPoint or a handout. I then move into the anticipation guide

where students are asked to think about the topics that will be presented in ​Romeo and Juliet ​and

also introduce the class discussion norms as we continue through the unit through “Secret

Shakespeare” or online discussion boards. Then, we get into looking at the Prologue, where

students have the opportunity to have some fun with their own creative writing. This brings us

into the reading, where students have the opportunity to get up, get moving, and get engaged

with the play.

While reading the play, there are mini-lessons that are spread out over the course of the

reading, which I incorporated to break up the monotony of reading or listening to the audio and

to allow students to build upon their knowledge, skills, and ideas throughout the play; therefore, I

decided against reading the play in one fell swoop in order to try to maintain that student

engagement. For example, if a student had one thought about family expectations at the

beginning of the play, then Secret Shakespeare or online discussion boards allow them to revisit

those ideas and see other points of view before they reach the conclusion of the unit. If students
are presented varying lessons of writing using rhythm, then they can connect to the

Shakespearean language and play with their own writing style. I also included times to watch/act

out the play because I sometimes find the task of teaching a play in an English classroom a tricky

business - someone once told me “Having students read a play is like teaching a person baseball

with a rulebook.” I do truly believe that plays were meant to be watched, however, not being a

theater teacher, I find that I can use film instead.

Finally, I sequenced the research paper to be at the end of the unit to allow students to

build upon their ideas throughout the unit (in terms of specific topics related to​ Romeo and

Juliet​) and then having them expand their thinking by reading through articles. Since students

will be familiar with the play, they can make more connections in their research paper.

What was your thought process for integrating technology and accommodating diverse
learners?

First, my thought process for integrating technology focused on student lives - I know

that students face online discussion forums every day, particularly on social media. More often

than not, I see freshmen students unable to navigate social media, and many times they become

immersed in cruel comments and judgements due to anonymity. This is where “Secret

Shakespeare” comes into play. My hope is that by providing these difficult topics while also

providing guidelines and a platform for discussion (while also maintaining the “distance” that is

equated with online discussion and social media), it will help them develop skills to address

others in a positive, respectful way. Additionally, I kept in mind that “The most engaging and

effective courses were organized around controversies or opposing arguments”(Wiggins and

McTighe 204).
 I integrated technology through NoRedInk, which is not only a requirement through our

formal curriculum but can also be a great way to personalize grammar lessons. NoRedInk tailors

its questions specifically to student’s individual interests, therefore it can help them become

much more involved in the grammar process. Finally, I integrated technology through the use of

Socrative - this is a great tool that allows students to have instantaneous feedback. When students

take one of the formative assessments or the summative, common assessment, they can be

provided information right away regarding how they did on specific questions and overall. This

is also incredibly helpful as a teacher because I can see instant feedback from students and

individual questions. Finally, I incorporated the research unit to help balance digital text with

printed text (Muhtaris and Ziemke 45). Students will be reading from the play itself, and then be

given the opportunity to read from a computer and develop their literacy skills in that facet.

My thought process for accommodating diverse learners first stemmed from accessibility

to all learners. Therefore, in each specific lesson, I thought of ways that the lessons could be

modified in order to allow for that accessibility. For example, if students do not want to read the

play aloud because they are struggling with the Shakespearean language, then they can listen to

the audio. As another example, detailed outlines are provided for students who are not sure how

to structure a five-paragraph research paper. Finally, the lessons account for accommodating

learners by providing multiple ways for students to be involved (i.e. small groups, large groups,

online, individual work, guided reading, etc.)

How would this unit be different if the assessments were removed?

In determining acceptable evidence, I thought of both the informal and formal

assessments that I would be completing with students (Wiggins and McTighe 18). If assessments
were removed from this unit, I don’t think the unit itself would be as effective. Students would

not receive as many cues from me as an educator, their progress could not be monitored, and

there would not be room for reflection and growth. There are a multitude of formative

assessments throughout the unit, including checks for comprehension, smaller writing pieces,

practicing grammar rules, and revisiting topics and themes as presented in the play. The

formative assessments are created to build off of each other and to draw students towards a

bigger conclusion. Furthermore, the summative common assessment that takes place at the end

of the unit allows the 9th grade teachers to align their classes and to reassess their overall goals

and learning targets. It allows us to bounce ideas off of each other and see where we can

improve in our own teaching of the unit.

Additionally, the research paper provides an opportunity for students to take a cumulative

viewpoint of their writing from throughout the school year. It allows them to demonstrate their

skills and take their learning one step further - by using their writing to analyze and interpret

their education and what it means to them.

What was the most exciting or fun part of this process?

The most exciting part of this process was having the opportunity to revamp my ​Romeo

and Juliet​ unit plan. I felt like I fell into a rut with this unit in particular because I’ve had good

intentions of revising and revisiting it but, unfortunately, I don’t always feel ready and able to do

so particularly at the end of the school year. I also think it was a great opportunity to work with

the other 9th grade teachers and bounce ideas off of each other - it not only got us motivated to

better align our standards and learning goals, but it also led to great discussion on the skills we

want students to take away from these specific curricular pieces. I also found it more fun to find
the “Hook and hold” if I had a better sense of direction for the unit itself (Wiggins and McTighe

201).

What was the most challenging part of this process?

The most challenging part of this process was narrowing down what I wanted to do. As I

stated earlier, I have been teaching ​Romeo and Juliet​ for many years, so I have collected a lot of

materials. In revisiting this unit plan, I stumbled upon so many great ideas and lessons that I had

forgotten about; there was a part of me that thought, “Oh, I should tie this in somehow!” but then

I thought, “What would the overall purpose of them be in relation to the unit goals outlined?” It

was also a bit challenging to start with the goals first and then work my way backward (although,

once I had the goals finalized, picking out the instruction and activities moved much more

smoothly and are more relevant). I wanted to to focus on ​purposeful ​work - “the work must be

purposeful from the ​student’s p​ oint of view in order to properly focus attention and provide

direction”(Wiggins and McTighe 199). Finally, I found it a bit challenging to narrow down the

unit goals to a few realistic and achievable goals. I saw that it could be easy to have too many

goals and then be overwhelmed with the process.

How did this unit planning compare or contrast with past units you’ve planned?

First of all, in this unit, I tried to allow for more opportunities for feedback than I have in

my previous units. This course had me questioning, “How effective is my feedback?”(Hattie and

Timperley 82). I realized through this course that I don’t always allow students the opportunity

to reflect on their learning and to revisit ideas. Therefore, this unit is much different from

previous units because I allotted time for those specific goals. Secondly, I feel as though this unit

is much more solid, relevant, and organized than it was previously. This process has allowed me
to consider every piece, whether that be one question on an anticipation guide or the entirety of

the research paper. As stated in our reading, the two “sins” of transitional design included

activity-oriented design and aimlessness “coverage” (Wiggins and McTighe 16-17). Therefore,

this was something that I always kept in the back of my mind when flushing out activities and

instruction.

Overall, this unit plan feels as though every moving part is meaningful and has a purpose.

It taught me the complexities of the thought process behind unit plans. As written in

Understanding by Design, “​ True, backward design calls for carefully thinking about the goals,

logically deriving assessments from the goals, and finally inferring the appropriate learning

activities. But in practice, all design is a non-linear process”(Wiggins and McTighe 254). I think

creating this unit plan and analyzing the thought process behind it is the epitome of this

statement.